Why I won't get a Google+ Custom URL

259 点作者 vrypan超过 11 年前

60 条评论

Here's how it works. The techies create something. The legals come along and say, OK, to release that in the wild it needs some T&Cs that cover our arses for everything and then some, because people keep sueing us.In practice, would Google ever dare invoke this on a large scale? No, you know that. Yes, there should be some transparent process that is undertaken if yours were revoked, but Google only like stuff that scales, manual processes like that don't.And really, if the ability to revoke your URL at any time wasn't in the T&Cs, do you really think it would make any difference to the revoke rate?Sure, nobody in their right mind would depend on such a URL sticking around, but this post isn't "Why I won't get a Google+ Custom URL", it's "Why I won't use a Google+ Custom URL as the primary mechanism to link to myself online". I don't see much argument against just claiming one, if you're already a g+ user.

评论 #6699705 未加载

评论 #6699149 未加载

评论 #6700045 未加载

评论 #6699959 未加载

评论 #6699518 未加载

评论 #6699524 未加载

Ensorceled超过 11 年前

Why I won't get a Custom URL:> Many people have the same name. Add a few extra letters or numbers to this URL to get one that is unique for you.Why would I want yet another "MyName<randomcrap>" identifier? How does that help friends and family remember or identify me? What purpose does it serve?I'm yet another person with a nickname that identifies me all over and has for years, I too own the domain. But Google+ keeps insisting I have my "real name" ... except it's not my real name because I have to add random crap to be unique.I have no idea why they cling to this.

评论 #6699485 未加载

评论 #6700860 未加载

评论 #6701947 未加载

评论 #6699633 未加载

chestnut-tree超过 11 年前

How did Google not realise when they launched Google+ that URLs that end in ridiculously long strings of numbers (107350252619396782277) was a poor idea? Now it feels like they're adding a sticking plaster to fix their initial design decision.Google+ on the whole seems quite poorly designed from a UX perspective. Most people seem to use Google+ like a blog, but the two column card layout on the desktop (three columns on some Google+ sites) makes it impossible to read posts in chronological order. This is so blazingly obvious, one can only wonder why Google went ahead with this pattern. If the site is optimised for mobile (which seems to be the case), why do they push the same design to desktop?The way comments open up in a small scrollable panel also makes for a pretty miserable experience on the desktop. As does clicking a tag and having to explore everying from within the constricted space of a card (again why do they push this pattern to desktop users if it's intended for mobile users?)Can you actually add titles for Google+ posts? It doesn't seem so. This means you redundantly repeat the name of the blog author as the title of every single card/post.And what's with the bizarre gigantic image at the top of the page that only reveals itself when you scroll to the top? Was this meant to be a delightful surprise feature? It just feels odd.Finally, there is a button on the left-hand side of the page in the header. It looks like a button, it's shaped like a button. But when you move your mouse pointer over the button, a menu appears automatically (on rollover). If it's meant to be a rollover drop-down menu, then don't make it look like a clickable button. As always with Google and their UX, it's one step forward, two steps back (IMO).

评论 #6699374 未加载

评论 #6699797 未加载

评论 #6702065 未加载

评论 #6700846 未加载

kibwen超过 11 年前

I noticed the same clause in the TOS last week and was taken aback. Ideally I'd love to be able to distribute my Google+ URL with the same confidence as I distribute my email address: namely, if you send a message to this address, you can guarantee that I'm the one who receives it. The fear here is that, should Google start charging for this "service" in the future, and should I decline to play along, someone else could squat on my former URL and intercept any traffic intended for my page. Please, Google, for my own peace of mind, either make this a paid service up-front, or pledge that a given URL will always alias to the same individual.(Though perhaps the email analogy is a bad one, since IIRC both Yahoo and MSN periodically release long-dormant addresses back into the eligible pool. Though still unsettling, it's a more reasonable approach than "we may force you to start paying us an unknown amount at some unknown future date".)Ultimately, I was about to go through with it anyway until I realized that doing so would require me to register a phone number with my Google account, which I have so far avoided. That requirement was the final straw.

评论 #6699770 未加载

评论 #6699396 未加载

评论 #6699922 未加载

suryamp超过 11 年前

Alright you guys, I'm gonna blow your minds.Try this kind of link: profiles.google.com/[YOUR USER NAME HERE]For example, vrypan's custom link would be: <a href="http://profiles.google.com/vrypan" rel="nofollow">http://profiles.google.com/vrypan</a>

评论 #6699398 未加载

评论 #6700510 未加载

评论 #6699893 未加载

评论 #6700819 未加载

devindotcom超过 11 年前

I almost claimed a custom URL yesterday when I was writing up the YouTube comment change and in the process updating my G+ profile. They wanted my number to claim it, which I believe they already have for 2-factor on Gmail. In the end the whole process with YouTube was so galling that I just deleted my whole account. As OP notes, it's not like Google+ was the first place people would look for me, and it's not a useful resource for me, so why have it at all?

评论 #6698909 未加载

edent超过 11 年前

Also worth noting is that you cannot change the url once assigned. So, better hope you don't get married - or that a serial killer has the same name as you. <a href="http://shkspr.mobi/blog/2013/10/googles-broken-name-policy-again/" rel="nofollow">http://shkspr.mobi/blog/2013/10/googles-broken-name-policy-a...</a>

macspoofing超过 11 年前

Is this really any different then the T&C that governs your cryptic <a href="https://plus.google.com/107350252619396782277/" rel="nofollow">https://plus.google.com/107350252619396782277/</a> url?Whatever the current T&Cs says, google can certainly reclaim or start charging for your current plus url, and heck even your google account. Google can do whatever the heck they want, and you really have no recourse.

declan超过 11 年前

<vrypan> is upset that Google+'s TOU for custom URLs gives the company too much unfettered discretion.In reality, Google+'s overall TOU for the service also gives the company plenty of discretion. As do similar ones from Twitter and Facebook. (Gasp! Bulk-delete your accounts now!) The overall Google+ TOU says, for instance, "Google reserves the right to restrict the content on your Google+ Page at its discretion."Facebook says you can't create "more than one personal account" or provide any "false personal information," which probably half of the folks on HN have done at some time or another. Facebook can "remove any content or information you post on Facebook" if, in its own discretion, the company feels like it violates the TOU.Twitter's TOU says it can "create limits on use and storage at our sole discretion at any time without prior notice to you." The company can delete tweets "at our sole discretion." And so on.In reality, as <davidjgraph> says, Google (and Facebook and Twitter) would not invoke this on a large scale. There would be a reputational impact. The language does come from the lawyers, but largely because of the plaintiff's bar, not because SV GCs enjoy adding this language to TOUs.tl;dr: If you're going to assume the worst from every company, you might as well never create any account or log in anywhere.

cloudwalking超过 11 年前

Honest question: are these terms of service significantly different than other services? Do Twitter / Github / etc have similar terms?

评论 #6699530 未加载

评论 #6699174 未加载

usaphp超过 11 年前

I think the author is making it a bigger deal than it really is, nothing stops google from bringing down the google plus or any other service he might be using(just like google reader or wave) so according to his logic (printed on business card etc...) you can't even have a long unfriendly URL because google can shut down google plus any day they want to or just start charging people.

评论 #6699481 未加载

saurik超过 11 年前

They authorized "JayFreemansaurik" and "JaysaurikFreeman" (both of which are highly confusing to even parse) for me, and the form won't even let me try to request "saurik" so I also gave up and am just a number.FWIW, I was totally OK in a world without usernames. The problem with usernames is that people figure out how to take them from you, and they get burned forever. What happens when we all die? I respected the numbers.When they added the username mechanism that seemed to be selling out on that wonderful principal. The result also is clearly suboptimal: cocacola has a username, but pepsi is just a number (as their trademark is too short).

josteink超过 11 年前

I have a name which is 100% unique in the world. There are no other people with my combination of first name and last name. Not in my ØÆÅ country. Not on the planet. None. Not making this up. It's a unique one. Certifiably.And Google has the balls to ask me to create a Google+ URL with lots of numbers and gibberish added? What? They can just seriously fuck off.

评论 #6700020 未加载

louthy超过 11 年前

The reason I won't get a custom URL is because after getting the "Click here to get your custom URL" email, I was informed I had to give them my mobile number before this process was achievable.It seems Google is on an absolute mission to get my mobile number, they've been relentlessly hinting that it's essential that I give it to them for what feels like forever.No Google, you cannot have it. Please, stop asking.

评论 #6700814 未加载

pearjuice超过 11 年前

PROTIP: Just redirect vrypan.com/plus to your G+ page.Bonus: Use vrypan.com/+

gesman超过 11 年前

For this exact reason I registered my own 1-letter URL shortener domain and use it to create my own custom redirects whenever I want without submitting to someone's BS TOS.It's better to promote your own brand than someone else's.Send me email at: g@c.gg :)

评论 #6699259 未加载

评论 #6699738 未加载

vonskippy超过 11 年前

His reasoning can be applied to all free social media, which is a valid reason, and why smart people should avoid the step back in time to a central AOL-esque media hub. He has his own domain, what more does he need? Why feed the social media black hole (all things enter - nothing escapes)?

ensmotko超过 11 年前

My custom Google+ URL is <a href="http://google.com/+AnžePečar" rel="nofollow">http://google.com/+AnžePečar</a> even though typing letters with diacritics is nearly impossible on 99% of the keyboards out there. I should have kept the random numbers...

评论 #6699692 未加载

评论 #6699693 未加载

uladzislau超过 11 年前

Why the phone verification is required to claim a custom URL? Custom URL is a poor incentive to provide Google your phone number.

评论 #6699252 未加载

评论 #6699114 未加载

评论 #6699508 未加载

brm超过 11 年前

When you read this, think about how many words an otherwise smart man wrote about something that's completely inconsequential. Down-vote me all you want but please consider how you're spending your brain power.

kolev超过 11 年前

Google's decision is stupid: they make one person happy and a gazillion others with the same name - pissed off. I'm not sure if any business wants to be in this position. I'm boycotting it as I have the proper username with Twitte, Facebook, LinkedIn - you name it. Why would I want to be something that doesn't represent me on Google+? Sorry, but we have choices and only a small portion of my friends use Google+ anyway. Poor choice, Google - if you started in the beginning, it would have been a good choice, but it's a bit too late for such nonsense. I still have not been offered a vanity name anyway and a bunch of people with a couple of friends were. You either do at for all at once or you don't at all. People take it as fair if somebody was first to register it. People think it's unfair when Google decides.

archagon超过 11 年前

At this point, I'm not even sure how my identity is split up on Google's servers between my original Google account, my Google Plus account, and my legacy YouTube account. Sometimes I feel like I'm logged into three different things at once. And now I can't even use my original username as my Google Plus URL? Does that mean that my legacy YouTube account is no longer active? Or has it been merged with my Google Plus profile without my consent, despite consistently clicking on "no thanks" every time the window popped up?This sort of quagmire causes me to unconsciously stop using the services causing it. Already, I've found myself much less interested in liking and favoriting YouTube videos.

评论 #6701008 未加载

echeese超过 11 年前

What I did before I got mine, was redirected mydomain.com/+ to my Google+ profile, it's shorter, and more importantly, I control it.

评论 #6699380 未加载

slowdown超过 11 年前

One more important thing about these custom URLs:1) Your Google+ profile is publicly indexable by searh engines.2) Having a custom URL means anyone searching for your name on Google is going to find out your Google+ profile easily. Basically, your identity is now even more easier to discover. (When contrasted to the ordinary Google+ URL of random numbers)3) If you are using the same profile picture on Google+ as your Facebook, people can track your Facebook profile, too. This is bad if you have a fairly active social life, but wanting a bit of a privacy.

ivanbrussik超过 11 年前

facebook - choose whatever username you wantHN - choose whatever username you wanttwitter - choose whatever username you wantreddit - choose whatever username you wanttumblr - choose whatever username you wantGoogle+ - we choose it for you, you can't change it, we might charge you for it, and we might also take it away at some pointalso - why does G+ need to insert the /u/0 after the domain name? twitter, facebook and the rest you can simply type domain.com/username but G+ just needs to make it so much less user friendly.

评论 #6700874 未加载

评论 #6701721 未加载

leepowers超过 11 年前

> A URL is an identifier. I'll use it to identify myself on this service. I'll link to it from my website. I may print it on a business card. Like Google said in their email, I'll use it to "point folks to my profile". But they can take it away for any reason or decide to charge me a (yet unknown) amount of money in the future? No way. I'll stay with my current, unfriendly one, <a href="https://plus.google.com/107350252619396782277/" rel="nofollow">https://plus.google.com/107350252619396782277/</a>Uh, what makes you think that Google doesn't have the right to take away the numeric URL or charge money for the numeric URL? (Or simply change the URL structure/scheme for Google+ at any point in the future.) Whether you use a numeric URL or personalized URL is irrelevant: Any service/server you don't control can change at any time for any reason. You should always direct people to a domain you own and control, even if all that domain does is auto-redirect to your current Google/Facebook/Github/whatever profile.

mxuribe超过 11 年前

I firmly believe that using uncontrolled urls - such as facebook, g+, etc. - on business cards, print material, or even as your established "online home" is unwise. I think its better to maintain/publish urls originating from a domain name that YOU control...And then create links (with underlying associated metadata "rel=me" style links) or setup redirects...Such as: YourDomain.com/gplus or YourDomain.com/linkedin...etc...This leaves YOU in control. Can be done on the really cheap. And if google, fbook, linkedin, or any of these services changes things around such as urls, or UI, or ToC, or anything YOU don't agree with, then you kill the redirection/links. Quick, easy and from one central point.Granted their sites will have a little more SEO juice up front...And, maybe I'm being idealistic, but eventually all search engines will begin to see that YOUR domain is the authoritative point on the web for YOU...and that the start point is YOUR domain not the myriad of social networks.

评论 #6706146 未加载

reidrac超过 11 年前

This is weird. I could suggest a custom URL typing it myself. The form said that it would be reviewed but it got approved straight away.May be is because I just used Google's suggestion but removing the accent in my surname (I don't like them in an URL, and besides is the same thing I use in LinkedIn).That was 9 days ago.

评论 #6699094 未加载

评论 #6699186 未加载

评论 #6699060 未加载

a3_nm超过 11 年前

At least the TOS are honest and transparent. Even if Google did not warn specifically that they can kick people out or start asking for money, they would of course be free to do so. So, is it worse if Google reminds you that you have no guarantees whatsoever? ...

wnevets超过 11 年前

Doesnt twitter and facebook have the same type of ToS?

atmosx超过 11 年前

Doesn't ALL free services have he same sort of clause?I'm missing what's new compared to using... put here any the non-paid service online?EDIT:Here are Gmail Terms of Service[1]: --- Modifying and Terminating our ServicesWe are constantly changing and improving our Services. We may add or remove functionalities or features, and we may suspend or stop a Service altogether. ---What happens if they suddenly suspend their service? NOTHING! :-) we all hope and have many reasons to believe that they wont do that, anytime soon.[1]: <a href="http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/update/" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/update/</a>

goldenkey超过 11 年前

An example of such shenanigans is WeWorkRemotely.com. It was posted to HN recently, and was totally free. Less than a week later and they want $200 for a listing. Egregious behavior, especially for something put on by 37 signals.

shurcooL超过 11 年前

I tried to get a Google+ custom URL and couldn't. They require a phone number to send you a confirmation SMS. I no longer have this protocol (due to an abundance of more technically advanced, and free to use alternatives).

amakaruk超过 11 年前

This is based on inductive reasoning:This process is heading toward a time when your online identity corresponds directly to your personal ID. This will create a debate between at least two sides:1. Privacy rights activists will argue that tech companies are complicit with the NSA and that we should fear totalitarianism and a police state's repression.2. Others will argue that this verisimilitude between the online self and the material self provides for security and convenience.On the one hand you have those that value freedom and on the other hand you have those that value convenience.

lyricalpolymath超过 11 年前

We hacked this nonsense by creating a simple redirect on our website: <a href="http://eyevel.com/G+" rel="nofollow">http://eyevel.com/G+</a> ;) You can too! It's a simple htaccess line or a router on your appput this into the .htaccess of your host and change where appropriate (yourdomain, extension and G+ long userID)RewriteEngine onRewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^yourDomain\.com$ [OR]RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www\.yourDomain\.com$RewriteRule ^B\@G\+$ "https\:\/\/plus\.google\.com\/103815970554408703928\/posts" [R=301,L]

anoncow超过 11 年前

While choosing a unique url you also give Google the right to (almost) publicly list your mobile number (Helping a user find you if they know your number). I can see websites, which store all possible number combinations to drive page views, trying to get username, email and other details from this Google feature. Soon everyone who gives Google their mobile number will have their name, G+ profile and possibly email id made public.

carrot超过 11 年前

Wow, I didn't know that. I got the same e-mail and went all the way through with this exact same processor for one of my "pages". When I think about it, I don't really care as much about that G+ page as the other related social networking profiles, but this would still affect me if it were enforced at some point in the future. Well, I made the change, unlike you. Score one for actually reading the TOS.

Guillaumeish超过 11 年前

What about a workaround?I'm /guillaumeish pretty much everywhere, and using my "real name" it's against my religion. I can't do it.I got no time to test it atm (and I don't remember the G+ policies on name changes) but couldn't you just change your name to "Vry Pan", refresh and claim the VryPan handle... than change your name back to whatever it was before? They have a time restriction like facebook?

pkrumins超过 11 年前

You all already have a nice looking google+ url, you just don't know about it. It's:<pre><code> http://profiles.google.com/first_part_of_your_gmail_email </code></pre> For example, my email is peteris.krumins@gmail.com, and my google+ url is:<pre><code> http://profiles.google.com/peteris.krumins .</code></pre>

评论 #6701098 未加载

espadrine超过 11 年前

I remember having been similarly surprised by the TOS.However, the only annoyance and consequence of it, to me, is that I cannot share the link anymore than I used to. So I switched, and I'll switch back if they ask me to pay.I am much more worried about them discontinuing Gmail. Since Reader, I have no idea what they are ready to kill.

sarreph超过 11 年前

Unfortunately, there is likely [please correct me if I'm wrong] a similarly-worded array of clauses in the contracts for many of their other services (or even g+ itself), that if taken seriously (i.e. not in a legalese manner), would likely cause a similar level of unjust alarm.

privasectech超过 11 年前

I wrote about this over a week ago, also they demand your cell phone number and apparently don't allow you to change it.<a href="http://privasectech.com/2013/10/terms-service-google-vanity-url/" rel="nofollow">http://privasectech.com/2013/10/terms-service-google-vanity-...</a>

iamleppert超过 11 年前

In other news, Google can do whatever they want with URLs they own & control. To think that your long number URL is any less safe is equally as amusing as thinking just because they give you a vanity URL, it's yours forever.Google will do what they like with any Google-owned property.

ez77超过 11 年前

Does anybody know if Google plans to allow claiming a deleted account... ever? I'm hoping that since I was granted +MyName in G+ I will be allowed to recover (long story) MyName@gmail.com... (It was MyName@googlemail.com and I wasn't happy... and let it expire...)

torbit超过 11 年前

There like domain names. No surprised at all. I'm surprised twitter hasn't charged yet.

math0ne超过 11 年前

I'm sure the exact same things apply to the current unfriendly url you are using now.

sblawrie超过 11 年前

Panayotis, you spelled the word "intellectual" wrong on your homepage.

评论 #6698958 未加载

INIT_6超过 11 年前

Gplus.<mydomain>.com I fixed this problem a while ago.

评论 #6700297 未加载

kuahyeow超过 11 年前

Got the +Custom Url in the end, despite the unchangeability. Does this matter much, if one has their own domain name, anyway ? Btw, the long form url still works

lemcoe9超过 11 年前

I will soon make a post: "Why I don't care that you won't change your Google+ Custom URL."

joeblau超过 11 年前

I got mine! The only place that I didn't get my name exactly the way I want it is on Twitter.

benmarks超过 11 年前

Wait, you read the T&C's?

ultimatedelman超过 11 年前

i thought this article was going to be about how the "verify your phone number" system doesn't actually send you a text message to verify your phone, thus making it impossible to actually claim said custom URL....

_mvuc超过 11 年前

That's why I never agree to anyone's terms and conditions online.

GalacticDomin8r超过 11 年前

Why I won't read articles that begin with "Why I"

cuillevel3超过 11 年前

The argument makes no sense. URLs are not meant to point to the same resource forever. They are not 'permanent'.And Google won't just start billing his credit card without consent...

yuletide666超过 11 年前

Wait, people still use Google+?

评论 #6700558 未加载

gcb1超过 11 年前

im pretty sure those 3 points are true of any service, anywhere.

keeblus超过 11 年前

Tl;dr I like to whine.

ye超过 11 年前

I don't understand why they call it "custom". More like "assigned".

评论 #6698930 未加载